Landovský: “The agreement will help Kyiv. If the US is mining somewhere, security forces will be present”
The United States and Ukraine signed an agreement to create a US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, which, according to its proponents, will move Ukraine closer to long-term peace and stability. Jakub Landovský, director of the Aspen Institute for Central Europe and former Czech ambassador to NATO, spoke to Czech Radio about aspects of the agreements and on how they could, in his view, provide security guarantees to the region.
According to its backers, the Ukraine–United States Mineral Resources Agreement — which is a part of the US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund — aims at leveraging Ukraine’s vast natural resources to support its post-war reconstruction. The deal, strongly backed by US President Donald Trump, has received criticism because of, among other reasons, how American firms would benefit from Ukraine’s estimated $524 billion post-war reconstruction.
For Jakub Landovský, the deal primarily comes from the US’s goal to become more competitive with China when it comes to having access to rare earth minerals:
“If you look purely at the economic returns, that's where the United States is playing a major strategic game—chipping away at China's influence, which is currently the dominant world power in mining and processing rare earths, as well as other critical minerals and elements needed by US industry.”
Landovský further claimed that it is a good sign that US industry could increase its cooperation with Ukraine because of the security benefits as well as some economic benefits. He pointed out that if the US is mining somewhere, it would also guarantee some military processes so that the mining is safe, which Landovský said, could establish security guarantees for Ukraine.
That said, Landovský expressed concern that the European Union has no part in the bilateral agreement, suggesting that it will need to work on establishing further economic cooperation with Ukraine, separate from these agreements.
According to skeptics, however, there are reasons to doubt whether the US's security guarantees in exchange for Ukraine allowing them to mine on its territory are realistic. Despite this, Landovský insists that this could benefit Ukraine:
“The agreement demonstrates that the United States’ initial proposal was intended as a starting point for negotiations, and—as Donald Trump suggests—a much better 'deal' can be reached than the original offer. The contract is described as genuinely long-term. During the first decade, investment will primarily focus on Ukraine, particularly in sectors such as mining. Ukraine will retain the right to manage its critical assets, but in its cooperation with the United States, it will utilize this key mechanism—a fifty-fifty revenue-sharing model.”
Landovský visited Ukraine recently as part of the Aspen Institute's mission to deliver more aid to the Ukrainian army from the Czech organization Post Bellum. While there, he noticed a sense of fatigue, he said, adding to his view that it is in Ukraine’s interest to consider the Trump administration’s proposals:
“The war has been ongoing for three years, and no one told the Ukrainians at the outset that it would last this long. Most Europeans, and perhaps even the United States, wrote them off in the early stages. But they fought with remarkable courage.
“Now, however, a sense of fatigue has set in. And unlike us, they have every right to feel exhausted. At the same time, the Ukrainian nation bears deep scars—scars that make certain concessions, such as those involving territory, incredibly difficult. Right now, everyone is hoping for at least a brief moment to catch their breath.”
